Illegal Courtesy Runner Penalty Assessment

[VolUmp]

So ... it would appear that for a coach to put in an illegal courtesy runner before any playing action takes place, it would have to be an oversight on the officials' part since we track CRs.

Clearly, I understand we should prevent an honest mistake from happening if we can, and I have done so many times.  That fact notwithstanding, suppose a coach does enter an illegal courtesy runner that gets past us ... at what point is it no longer correctable, and thus punishable with an out and a player dugout restriction?

1) Once the ball is put back in play?

2) After a pitch, play, or appeal has been made?

3) Only if the team is ahead or behind by at least ten runs?

4) Only on Tuesdays?

I find no mention of this mandate in the Rule nor Case Books.  Absent this mandate, my answer would be A.

I'm envisioning a defensive coach noticing it and waiting until he knows it's punishable before calling time and bringing it to my attention.

Similar to waiting until a player batting out of order has completed his at bat before bringing it up.

[maven]

For the purpose of answering this question, I would treat a CR like a substitute. Some basis for doing so is given in CR Rule 7, according to which an illegal CR is treated as an illegal sub. A sub becomes a player when he's on base and the ball becomes live (3-1-1a). Up to that point, we can fix it without penalty.

[Jimurray]

4 hours ago, maven said:

For the purpose of answering this question, I would treat a CR like a substitute. Some basis for doing so is given in CR Rule 7, according to which an illegal CR is treated as an illegal sub. A sub becomes a player when he's on base and the ball becomes live (3-1-1a). Up to that point, we can fix it without penalty.

I think somewhere in FED an announced sub becomes a sub when he is given to the ump and is announced. Then he would be an illegal sub.

[Jimurray]

Following on:

2006 interps:

SITUATION 18: With a runner on first and the pitcher struggling in the top of the fifth inning, S1 comes to the mound and begins to throw his warm-up pitches. His coach announces to the plate umpire the change, who marks it on his lineup card and announces to the home scorekeeper. After only four warm-up pitches, the defensive coach decides he wants a different player to pitch. The visiting coach argues that since the ball had not yet been made live, the substitution had not been made and he can change his mind. RULING: Once the umpire-in-chief has accepted the change, marked it on his lineup and announced the change, the substitution is in effect. The substitute pitcher must pitch until the batter then at bat, or any substitute for that batter, is put out or reaches first base, or until a third out has been made. Therefore, the coach cannot change his substitute pitcher until the pitching conditions have been met. The only exception to this requirement would be if the substitute pitcher became incapacitated or guilty of flagrant unsportsmanlike conduct. If there had been no announcement of the substitution, the unreported substitution would be considered to have been made when the pitcher took his place on the pitcher’s plate and the ball was made live. (3-1-1, 3-1-2)

 

 

[VolUmp]

So,

Coach:  "Blue, I'm running #16 for my catcher."

Me:  "Time! Got it ... " (notate it in my folio).  "Miss Scorekeeper, we have #16 running for the catcher."

Her:  "But, he ran earlier for the pitcher."

Me:  "Good point ... "

        "Coach!  #16 is out and restricted.  He ran earlier for the pitcher and I've already notated it and announced it to the scorekeeper." 

Coach:  "WTF??"

Me:  "Play!"

[ALStripes17]

So,

Coach:  "Blue, I'm running #16 for my catcher."

Me:  "Time! Got it ... " (notate it in my folio).  "Miss Scorekeeper, we have #16 running for the catcher."

Her:  "But, he ran earlier for the pitcher."

Me:  "Good point ... "

        "Coach!  #16 is out and restricted.  He ran earlier for the pitcher and I've already notated it and announced it to the scorekeeper." 

Coach:  "WTF??"

Me:  "Play!"

If you're making that mark on your card and don't see it, we have bigger issues with your umpiring at play than we do a pissed off coach

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Jimurray]

8 hours ago, VolUmp said:

So,

Coach:  "Blue, I'm running #16 for my catcher."

Me:  "Time! Got it ... " (notate it in my folio).  "Miss Scorekeeper, we have #16 running for the catcher."

Her:  "But, he ran earlier for the pitcher."

Me:  "Good point ... "

        "Coach!  #16 is out and restricted.  He ran earlier for the pitcher and I've already notated it and announced it to the scorekeeper." 

Coach:  "WTF??"

Me:  "Play!"

Your response to the coach should be "Coach he can't CR for the pitcher, are you giving me a PR?

[maven]

9 hours ago, Jimurray said:

I think somewhere in FED an announced sub becomes a sub when he is given to the ump and is announced. Then he would be an illegal sub.

The case play you cite should not be extended to the CR case under discussion.

The basis for the ruling in the case play is that game action has commenced after the substitution: S1 has thrown 4 warm up pitches. True, that happens during a dead ball: but we have stopped the game, brought in the sub, recorded him, and he has started to perform as a player during that dead ball period. It would create an unreasonable delay to allow another substitution at that point. We should also note that the case play rules that another substitution must be disallowed, not that we impose an illegal sub penalty on the defense.

The CR case here is different: there is no delay, the CR has done nothing yet. I'm ruling that the window for substituting has not yet closed: the scorekeeper's information is part of the announcement of the sub ("he can't legally be a CR" = substitution not yet successfully made). No penalty here: fix it.

2 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Your response to the coach should be "Coach he can't CR for the pitcher, are you giving me a PR?

That's perfect, and fits my interpretation that the substitution window is still open. We're going to sort this runner's status (CR vs PR/sub), or put in a legal CR. And, with luck, we're going to do it quickly.

[Jimurray]

5 minutes ago, maven said:

The case play you cite should not be extended to the CR case under discussion.

The basis for the ruling in the case play is that game action has commenced after the substitution: S1 has thrown 4 warm up pitches. True, that happens during a dead ball: but we have stopped the game, brought in the sub, recorded him, and he has started to perform as a player during that dead ball period. It would create an unreasonable delay to allow another substitution at that point. We should also note that the case play rules that another substitution must be disallowed, not that we impose an illegal sub penalty on the defense.

The CR case here is different: there is no delay, the CR has done nothing yet. I'm ruling that the window for substituting has not yet closed: the scorekeeper's information is part of the announcement of the sub ("he can't legally be a CR" = substitution not yet successfully made). No penalty here: fix it.

That's perfect, and fits my interpretation that the substitution window is still open. We're going to sort this runner's status (CR vs PR/sub), or put in a legal CR. And, with luck, we're going to do it quickly.

I believe the Interp I cite would apply to any announced sub. In OBR and I think NCAA the sub is official when given to the umpire. Your cite of 3-1-1-a is only for unnannounced subs. But in any sub sit I would use preventive umpiring to keep from having to apply the interp. 

[Kevin_K]

11 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I believe the Interp I cite would apply to any announced sub. In OBR and I think NCAA the sub is official when given to the umpire. Your cite of 3-1-1-a is only for unnannounced subs. But in any sub sit I would use preventive umpiring to keep from having to apply the interp. 

Game management is so critical!

[noumpere]

43 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I believe the Interp I cite would apply to any announced sub. In OBR and I think NCAA the sub is official when given to the umpire. Your cite of 3-1-1-a is only for unnannounced subs. But in any sub sit I would use preventive umpiring to keep from having to apply the interp. 

Yes -- it applies to subs.  CRs are not, by definition, subs.

[Jimurray]

3 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Yes -- it applies to subs.  CRs are not, by definition, subs.

They are not subs until they become illegal:

"7. A player who violates the courtesy-runner rule is considered to be an illegal substitute."

So academically what rule would we apply? 3-1-1? And the 2006 interp?

[maven]

48 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I believe the Interp I cite would apply to any announced sub. In OBR and I think NCAA the sub is official when given to the umpire. Your cite of 3-1-1-a is only for unnannounced subs. But in any sub sit I would use preventive umpiring to keep from having to apply the interp. 

The CR is not unannounced, but his status is indeterminate: we can't announce an illegal sub or illegal CR, so he can't be in the game yet (whatever we announce). We need not apply the 2006 interp (legal sub, legally in the game during a dead ball) because we don't have a sub/CR in the game yet.

Seems we all agree that, in the time frame of the OP, we can fix this without imposing any penalties.

[VolUmp]

2 hours ago, ALStripes17 said:

If you're making that mark on your card and don't see it, we have bigger issues with your umpiring at play than we do a pissed off coach.

How about re-reading the OP?

[VolUmp]

37 minutes ago, maven said:

Seems we all agree that, in the time frame of the OP, we can fix this without imposing any penalties.

Very much agreed.

I stated clearly in the OP that to have an illegal CR, it would mean that I or We (officials) screwed up too.

But by rule, there has to be a "point of no return."

I'm going with putting the ball in play since there isn't anything any more specific.

[Jimurray]

18 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

Very much agreed.

I stated clearly in the OP that to have an illegal CR, it would mean that I or We (officials) screwed up too.

But by rule, there has to be a "point of no return."

I'm going with putting the ball in play since there isn't anything any more specific.

@maven would say this specific statement only applies to the described situation in the interp: " RULING: Once the umpire-in-chief has accepted the change, marked it on his lineup and announced the change, the substitution is in effect."

But it is specific until you peruse my 2011 BRD where Carl (RIP) allows the wrong REPORTED pitcher to be replaced between innings because the ball had not become "live".

[NorthTexasUmp]

@VolUmp By "Point of no return", are you referring to the point at which we no longer impose any or all penalties? 

[VolUmp]

7 minutes ago, NorthTexasUmp said:

@VolUmp By "Point of no return", are you referring to the point at which we no longer impose any or all penalties? 

No ... the opposite ... the point at which we MUST impose penalties if it is noticed by the opposing coach, scorekeeper, myself or my partner.

Runner is out and restricted to the dugout for the remainder of the game.

[BT_Blue]

On Wed Dec 28 2016 at 10:09 PM, VolUmp said:

So,

Coach:  "Blue, I'm running #16 for my catcher."

Me:  "Time! Got it ... " (notate it in my folio).  "Miss Scorekeeper, we have #16 running for the catcher."

Her:  "But, he ran earlier for the pitcher."

Me:  "Good point ... "

        "Coach!  #16 is out and restricted.  He ran earlier for the pitcher and I've already notated it and announced it to the scorekeeper." 

Coach:  "WTF??"

Me:  "Play!"

Sorry... but if I get told this (cause I missed it on my own for some reason) I am going to the coach immediately to fix it. And by fix it... I DON'T mean that I am calling the kid out and sticking him on  the pine!

This can be fixed all the way up until the umpire screws up (again) by putting the ball back in play (THERE is your point of no return by the way). And that is exactly what I plan to do.

[VolUmp]

Go to Webster and look up these three words:

Irony.  Facetious.  Sarcasm.

[BT_Blue]

2 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

Go to Webster and look up these three words:

Irony.  Facetious.  Sarcasm.

I'm not saying you, or anyone on this page, would have this exchange with a HC. But I could see this happening. And we all know and work with the "gotcha" umpire.

[VolUmp]

I just saw this for the first time: 

2-36-3e

An illegal substitute is:

... a player who violates the courtesy runner rule.

This doesn't change anything we've discussed concerning preventive officiating, but it does give Maven's comment plenty of credence to treat an illegal CR as an illegal sub … because … he is one …

[Donny7]

On ‎1‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 7:42 PM, VolUmp said:

I just saw this for the first time: 

2-36-3e

An illegal substitute is:

... a player who violates the courtesy runner rule.

This doesn't change anything we've discussed concerning preventive officiating, but it does give Maven's comment plenty of credence to treat an illegal CR as an illegal sub … because … he is one …

And... it is a continuing violation. Doesn't go away after the next pitch or the next defensive play.

[Tborze]

 The first time a CR is announced, we obviously write down the # and position player (pitcher) he is running for. If later The HC wants to put that same CR in to run for the catcher, as others have said we should inform him he can not. 

What you are saying VolUmp, is if we miss it, he would be illegal after the ball was made live. I would probably admit my mistake and replace the CR upon discovery. 

Now I can see us missing a new CR who has already participated in the game. Then upon discovery of the now illegal player, he would be out and restricted.